Number of Solar Panels to power a Level-2 EV charger?

nsaspook

Joined Aug 27, 2009
13,544
@nsaspook: I see nothing in your links that say it failed or why. Not helpful except to prove that it is not completely new.

As for efficiency, if the loss is 10% I think practically everyone would gladly pay that to avoid sitting somewhere while their car charged for an hour.
Sorry but that's a lame response that again shows how counterproductive impractical things like this are to actual EV adoption and usage.
You never see the article that it failed or why because that doesn't generate clicks. Find a working commercial charging road from just one of those projects from years ago.

Your statement about gladly paying 10% more is obviously a joke from a person of means. That 10% could buy food for your kids or help pay the rent while working two jobs. 10% is the golden unicorn loss estimate, it's more likely to be about 20% from the utility pole to the car's charging system.

https://www.itskrs.its.dot.gov/2022-sc00508
Installation of a Dynamic Wireless Charging Lane for Electric Vehicles Estimated to Cost 6.3 to 6.6 Million Dollars per Mile in Indiana.
 
Last edited:

joeyd999

Joined Jun 6, 2011
5,392
Of course, and burning fossil fuels is not harmful in any way!
So where do you get the energy to charge EVs that are going to replace all the ICEs of both the personal and commercial fleets? Throw in aviation while you're at it, as your such an optimist that batteries can fly.
 

joeyd999

Joined Jun 6, 2011
5,392
Of course, and burning fossil fuels is not harmful in any way!
In fact, our modern, comfortable lives and all the abundance we have available to us, is a direct consequence of burning fossil fuels.

So yes, I agree that not burning fossil fuels is quite harmful in a life and death kind of way.
 

MrAl

Joined Jun 17, 2014
11,688
Reading this thread, it occurred to me that the ultimate solution is to charge the car while it drives via induction through coils embedded in the highway. Sure enough, it is being investigated:

EV charging road
Hi,

That would be absolutely amazing. I'm not sure if that would be practical though because it would require a huge infrastructure changeover. Virtually every road that needed that technology would have to be at least partly dug up and repaved. That's in a world where they don't even like to spend money just to repave.

How about embedded rare earth magnets. Coils in the car. Still quite a changeover for infrastructure unfortunately. That might make the distance car bottom to road surface too small though also.
Oh wait a minute. This also requires the car to be MOVING, which means it will be expending energy as it moves, and we know we don't get anything for nothing, so probably the energy gained will be lost just by requiring the car to move within the magnetic field. So maybe we are stuck with coils that are being energized from an external source.
Then again, that will mean driving through a magnetic field which requires energy in itself.
Perhaps some calculations are in order.
 

MrAl

Joined Jun 17, 2014
11,688
Sorry guys, but I will wait for more data.

@nsaspook: I don’t think it needs to be ALL highways, or it will be the complete solution. I just think it is worth investigating.

@joeyd999: Is your imagination so poor that you can’t see the possibilities for having the users pay for the power?
Hi,

And then here come the road tolls. Maybe still not a bad idea though, if it works that is.
 

MrAl

Joined Jun 17, 2014
11,688
Please educate me. I see no theoretical reasons why it has to be less efficient than a transformer.
Hi,

I'm not entirely sure if you are still talking about the road coils, but I think we all know that wireless charging is very inefficient even when there are small separation distances involved. Transformers have very small distances between coils, and that's a big difference than a wireless charger.
Add to that the car will be moving.
 

nsaspook

Joined Aug 27, 2009
13,544
Old habits die hard,
for an oil engine mechanic days doesn't come to nights seeing his hands with no dirt of oil.
OK Let's see your vision of what is a viable wireless road charging solution. Crickets ...
Just think about how much energy an entire country could waste if wireless charging became a thing.

We've had practical electric cars since at least the 1900s. If this wireless road charging technology was viable, even in the slightest, IMO we have some version of it already because the technology to build something has existed for decades. Instead we have a cottage industry of studies on top of studies and pilot programs on top of pilot programs that die once the taxpayers money runs out. Wash, rinse and repeat.
 
Last edited:

BobTPH

Joined Jun 5, 2013
9,257
IMHO there is no good solution for charging EVs when if they replace all ICE cars. Perhaps that means going all electric is a pipe dream itself. Many seem to believe that.

I read somewhere, and have not verified, that if home charging was the solution we would have to double the power delivered to residences in the country. I don’t know if that is a larger project than electrifying enough roads, but I think it is obvious that neither of these can be the complete solution.

The way I see the in road charging is only a small part of a complete solution. For me, a hime charger would do 90% of what I need, with on road charging providing some of what I would need for long trips.

Consider this: Say I have a car that will do 250 miles between charges. If on road charging extended it to 400 miles, I would almost never have to wait to get my car charged on a long trip, where I drive all day, charged partially during lunch, and, for multiple day trips, charged overnight.


Your statement about gladly paying 10% more is obviously a joke from a person of means. That 10% could buy food for your kids or help pay the rent while working two jobs.
Don’t know many poor people do you? I have watched home health aids who make $12 per hour spend $600 for a tattoo and $200 for a haircut / color. 10% of my total yearly auto fuel costs is far smaller than either of those expenses.
 

crutschow

Joined Mar 14, 2008
34,831
I read somewhere, and have not verified, that if home charging was the solution we would have to double the power delivered to residences in the country.
That's likely average energy, not power.
This can usually be done at night, when the overall main's power usage is lower.
Say I have a car that will do 250 miles between charges. If on road charging extended it to 400 miles, I would almost never have to wait to get my car charged on a long trip
The high power DC chargers now available in many locations can charge new EVs with a 250 mile range to 80% charge within 20 minutes, which is probably not much longer than many take to gas up, do a rest room break, and have a snack, so I think that should suffice for occasional trips longer than 200 miles in a day.
At least it is for me.

I don't see on-road charging ever being economic or efficient enough to be practical.
Note that we a talking about transferring upwards of 50kWHr of stored energy (about 1/3 kWHr per mile) plus the 20kW or so of power the car is using while moving at highway speeds.
 

BobTPH

Joined Jun 5, 2013
9,257
Note that we a talking about transferring upwards of 50kWHr of stored energy (about 1/3 kWHr per mile) plus the 20kW or so of power the car is using while moving at highway speeds
No, in the scenario I gave, it would be supplying less energy than the car was using.
 

MrAl

Joined Jun 17, 2014
11,688
IMHO there is no good solution for charging EVs when if they replace all ICE cars. Perhaps that means going all electric is a pipe dream itself. Many seem to believe that.

I read somewhere, and have not verified, that if home charging was the solution we would have to double the power delivered to residences in the country. I don’t know if that is a larger project than electrifying enough roads, but I think it is obvious that neither of these can be the complete solution.

The way I see the in road charging is only a small part of a complete solution. For me, a hime charger would do 90% of what I need, with on road charging providing some of what I would need for long trips.

Consider this: Say I have a car that will do 250 miles between charges. If on road charging extended it to 400 miles, I would almost never have to wait to get my car charged on a long trip, where I drive all day, charged partially during lunch, and, for multiple day trips, charged overnight.



Don’t know many poor people do you? I have watched home health aids who make $12 per hour spend $600 for a tattoo and $200 for a haircut / color. 10% of my total yearly auto fuel costs is far smaller than either of those expenses.
Hi Bob,

I must say, very well said. Especially the part about home charging. If everyone did that, we'd be up the creek not only without the proverbial paddle but probably with no arms to work it either.

I happen to be in an area that is affected by the problems with the grid in the USA today and so I have actually experience on what can happen because of grid problems. One of the problems is lower AC voltage. Not sure if anyone knows this, but on a 120vac RMS 60Hz line, "low line" is only 108vac RMS and that is somehow 'allowed'. That causes problems in itself, but the line can actually go lower than that in some areas. This can cause a lot of problems with home appliances even ones that do not draw a huge current (like even 5 amps).
It also does not matter to me what time of day "they" charge, because there's bound to be overlaps from one person to the next which will still cause problems. Charging at night is something that really has to be agreed upon, and we know where that goes. Even if everyone did agree, it's still just a matter of time before even that does not work anymore.

I know people that live in Los Angeles and there are already rolling blackouts. That means that if you live there you get no electric for some times during the day and/or night. that's already a problem so how the hell can allowing more people to use high energy charging equipment possibly be a solution to ANYTHING.

The mysteries of the human race. We're just humans so we can't understand it. It's all science, but we are not supposed to understand science :)
 

MrAl

Joined Jun 17, 2014
11,688
That's likely average energy, not power.
This can usually be done at night, when the overall main's power usage is lower.
The high power DC chargers now available in many locations can charge new EVs with a 250 mile range to 80% charge within 20 minutes, which is probably not much longer than many take to gas up, do a rest room break, and have a snack, so I think that should suffice for occasional trips longer than 200 miles in a day.
At least it is for me.

I don't see on-road charging ever being economic or efficient enough to be practical.
Note that we a talking about transferring upwards of 50kWHr of stored energy (about 1/3 kWHr per mile) plus the 20kW or so of power the car is using while moving at highway speeds.
Hi,

I do not think that charging at night is a long-term solution, and it has to be agreed upon by all users which can be hard to get to work. Maybe make a law for this?

I have not investigated the dynamics of road charging, but it seems to me that if you have to MOVE something to get energy out of it, that means you have to first put energy in in order to move it in the first place, and that is because it is working against the field. For example, a generator can put out 1kva but you have to put the energy in to get the energy out, and the energy in is in the form of a rotation, and that rotation takes power, and that means less than 100 percent efficiency.

That would mean the road coils would have be constantly generating all by themselves, and couple to the coils in the car, and that would be through magnetic field coupling. That's hard to do too because the distance between coils is all so important.

Maybe we can all go back to the old time San Fransisco trolley idea where we have a flag sticking up out of the back of the car that makes contact with a wire higher up that supplies all the electrical energy to the car. Lots of sparks are going to fly :)
 

nsaspook

Joined Aug 27, 2009
13,544
Don’t know many poor people do you? I have watched home health aids who make $12 per hour spend $600 for a tattoo and $200 for a haircut / color. 10% of my total yearly auto fuel costs is far smaller than either of those expenses.
Your comments prove my point. Those people are not poor.
Poor is what we were living on a farm with one pair of good shoes for school, driving a old, beat to hell truck with a floor hole in the cab and missing boards in the back. We would pick wild berries, walk miles to old Texas highway 6 to sell them on side of the road. 10% means a lot to those that are actually poor.
 
Last edited:

crutschow

Joined Mar 14, 2008
34,831
Yes, I did not state it clearly. It is the total energy delivered that would need to double.
That doesn't necessarily mean all the infrastructure would need to double in size, just generating capacity.

There will need to be significant changes and cost to do whatever it takes to slow global warming (of course we can just keep using more and more fossil fuels, as some on this forum have suggested, and let future generations deal with the aftermath).
EVs are the most efficient method, at this point, of converting a renewable energy source (sun, wind, geothermal, tidal, nuclear, etc.) to transportation use so, it would seem the emphasis should be on that.

If there's a better solution, (other than claiming we're not causing climate change) I'd like to hear it.
 

joeyd999

Joined Jun 6, 2011
5,392
Just because it's costly, (which seems to be your only concern) is not sufficient reason to ignore the problem.
Actually, unicorn farts are also technologically impossible -- pretty much the same as all "solutions" to "global warming", save nuclear.

But even nuclear won't "save" us. The Chinese and Indians will never buy in.
 

BobTPH

Joined Jun 5, 2013
9,257
Your comments prove my point. Those people are not poor.
Poor is what we were living on a farm with one pair of good shoes for school, driving a old, beat to hell truck with a floor hole in the cab and missing boards in the back. We would pick wild berries, walk miles to old Texas highway 6 to sell them on side of the road. 10% means a lot to those that are actually poor.
And that is what percentage of the people in the US today? That's who we should be designing infrastructure for?
 
Top